Ballistic Missile Defense: DOD Needs to Address Planning and Implementation Challenges for Future Capabilities in Europe

We are closing this recommendation as implemented. DOD partially concurred with this recommendation, stating that it intended to develop specific life cycle cost estimates for the radars, interceptors, and related systems that make up the larger, integrated European Phased Adaptive Approach rather than an estimate for the broader, integrated system. However, since our report was issued, the Director of the Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation prepared and later updated an independent cost assessment for the European Phased Adaptive Approach. The initial assessment was prepared in October 2012, and provided to congressional committees on February 25, 2014. It included equipment development, procurement, military construction, and operations and support costs through 2040 for the European Phased Adaptive Approach as it was conceived at that time. In response to congressional committee report language, DOD subsequently provided an updated assessment to Congress in June 2015. The updated estimate was prepared following the administration's decision to cancel the fourth phase of the approach, including the development of a more advanced Navy Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) interceptor (type IIB) that would have been deployed both afloat and in Poland and Romania under the original plan. DOD stated in both estimates that the results were highly uncertain, particularly given the stability, or lack thereof, associated with the Missile Defense Agency's plan. However, given congressional interest in receiving an updated estimate, we believe that the cost estimate contributes to oversight of the program by providing a cost basis for evaluating the European Phased Adaptive Approach and determining whether these plans are affordable and whether corrective actions are needed.

We are closing this recommendation as implemented. DOD fully concurred with this recommendation, stating that the Missile Defense Agency would factor in the combatant commands' operationally defined metrics when it determined whether its developmental and testing metrics were achievable, and whether these metrics met the commands' operational requirements. According to DOD officials, U.S. Strategic Command's metrics for assessing the operational effectiveness of ballistic missile defense elements and systems are intended to be general enough to be applied to all such capabilities, including all phases of the European Phased Adaptive Approach. DOD added that U.S. Strategic Command's metrics, which were last published in 2012, are to be reviewed in fiscal year 2016 to determine if a revision is needed to ensure they remain accurate and relevant in assessing future capabilities. However, in September 2014 U.S. Strategic Command and U.S. European Command finalized and distributed key operational capability criteria for Phase II of the European Phased Adaptive Approach, which address the deficiencies we identified in our report by specifying the system's expected performance against threats projected by the intelligence community. The criteria also establish durability requirements for operating the system, as well as physical protection standards. DOD added that U.S. Strategic Command, the Navy and Missile Defense Agency are working to incorporate these criteria into the U.S. Strategic Command's warfighter acceptance process. As a result, we believe these efforts show substantial progress on the part of DOD to implement this recommendation.